What does it take to create a program that matters to youth? We consider the issues from the theoretical to the practical through our work in Project Coach. PC is a Smith College program that teaches teenagers to be youth sport coaches. As a coach, our teenagers must inspire, communicate, problem solve, resolve conflict, plan strategically, and deploy a range of emotional intelligences.
PC uses sports as a means to engage, connect, and empower adolescents.

Wednesday, March 19, 2014

By now, most people probably agree that universal preschool is a
good thing despite continuing debate about how we should fund it. As an
investment, economist James Heckman, estimates that preschoolers attending high
quality programs can expect their future earnings as adults to increase by 17%.
Others have also shown that preschool attendance is positively associated with
subsequent 8th grade achievement scores and future employability.
When outcomes are monetized, economists project that for every dollar invested
in preschool programs; eight are returned.

Interwoven in this narrative is the belief that remediation later on
is not cost effective, as the vast array of programs for adolescents and young
adults have failed to alter trajectories started before a child arrives at
kindergarten.Given such data, crafting
and funding a national initiative for high quality universal preschool
certainly makes sense. But as parents, and professionals who have worked with
underserved adolescents, most of whom have not been to preschool, and many of
whom attend struggling schools, we have another take on what kids need, and when
they need it.

Yes, it's great to plant a seed in enriched soil, provide it with
ample moisture and sunlight, and get it to sprout. But, as any gardener knows,
a sprout rarely reaches maturity if it isn't nurtured.While we fully support universal high quality
preschool, we also feel uneasy about ending the discussion there, and simply
expecting the oft-reported short and longer-term academic, social and economic
benefits to materialize years latter through some mysterious process.

In contrast to those who seem certain that remediation latter is not
cost effective, we respectfully disagree.Over the years we have worked with many troubled adolescents who learned
how to thrive by becoming part of a caring community and engaging in an array
of activities that were meaningful to them. As a by-product of such experiences
they acquired resilience skills, while being nudged by caring adults, on a
daily basis, to stay focused and committed to pursing positive personal goals. New
research is corroborating our anecdotal observations. A recent report from the
National Bureau of Economic Research examined the impact of a fairly modest
lifeskills and tutoring program on the lives of underserved 9th and 10th grade
boys attending a Chicago school. Results show that the program increased
expected high school graduation rates by 14%, reduced the achievement gap in
math by 60%, reduced overall course failures by 66%, and increased GPA by about
half a letter grade. This was all achieved for about $4,400 per student, which
compares favorably with the costs associated with the Perry Preschool Program,
from which many of the early childhood policy initiatives are derived.
Researchers projected that for every $100 spent in this program, between $3,600
to $34,000 was returned.

Given these new data, it seems that we may have been a bit premature
in concluding that interventions that attempt to alter the life trajectories of
underserved youth as late as the early teenage years are not effective. These
new data also lead us to the inevitable question about when in a child’s development
is the optimal time to provide enhanced support to produce current and future
academic viability, good citizenship, and enhanced life prospects. Some contend
that early interventions are best because preschoolers are believed to have
greater neuroplasticity. Alternatively, the Chicago group argues that later
interventions may have a greater impact since they occur closer to when
important outcomes, such as high school graduation, or avoidance of serious
antisocial activities take place.

While we are sure that there
will be many who engage in a lively and provocative debate on whether it is
more advantageous and cost effective to intervene early or late, we do not see
this as a Hobson’s choice. Early intervention does not preclude later interventions
and vice versa. Like sowing a seed and making certain that it thrives, youth
need support early and continuously throughout their lives.

While policy wonks and politicians discuss how best
to enhance the well-being and future trajectories of underserved kids, many of
us have grown weary of the back and forth debates about such things as
vouchers, charter schools, themed schools, smaller schools, standardized tests,
and teacher evaluations. Today’s kids need support today in all aspects of
their lives, not just early in their lives, later on, or within just a narrow
subset of academic capacities.